I don’t remember exactly how it started, but it ended with my 20 year old returned missionary son crying, shaking, bearing his Mormon testimony, and then leaving to “take a walk.” Between all that I said some things, while true, that I regret and that he’s not ready to hear. He and a couple of my other children shared a few LGBTQ LDS experiences, both positive and negative, and things got a little too sensitive.

Without even trying to accurately report the full conversation, I’ll say that at one point my son said that the LDS church is very different from what it was when I was part of it. In 11 years since I left, things have supposedly so dramatically changed from the previous 40 years that I wouldn’t recognize it especially with regards to LGBTQ issues.

I’ve had lots of opinions on that book and the unintended consequences of its publication but I’ve held off saying anything because I hadn’t actually read it.

So, I read it.

I read it after it was being used as a weapon to diminish my voice and my LDS experience or to support an imaginary world where the LDS organization and community is LGBT friendly and anything but homophobic.

I am clearly NOT it’s intended audience.

I had completely forgotten the sycophantic tone of LDS authors but this was a big slapping reminder of that. Every time there’s a grand point to be made an LDS General Authority quote is inserted and the reader is supposed to ponder it in awe that a human being could utter such goodness. Each time that happened my eyes rolled back into my head a little more.

If there’s a sweeping theme of the book it’s that we (and by ‘we’ he means anyone who is a believing LDS member with an LGBTQ person in their midst, family, friend or ward member) should love and accept one another. THAT I can get behind, except that it completely ignores the status quo in most LDS wards, families and leadership quorums. According to Christofferson we’re not supposed to worry about LDS policies or leadership and the damage that they can do. It’s the old, “I don’t know and I don’t care. It will all be figured out in the afterlife.”

That’s naive and not good enough for me.

Let’s face a few facts. This book would never have been published if:

He were not the brother of an LDS apostle

He had not returned to the LDS faith like a prodigal son in his advanced years

He were still in a committed homosexual partnership like the one he was required to walk away from in order to get re-baptized and have his temple blessings restored.

As much as he and others pretend that the intention and message of the book is to honor any path and any choice, there would be no message and there would be no book without those 3 key elements. Those ARE the message. Given that fact, I’m left actually feeling sorry for the poor sap who, after 60 years, couldn’t break from the LDS homophobic indoctrination to remain committed to his loving partner.

The book reads like a tragedy to me for that reason.

It’s about the breakup of a family, but it’s just a gay family so the reality of that crisis never gets the full light of day.

It’s about an aging man who still so desperately wants to please his older brother that he’ll throw himself on the sword to do so.

It’s about the isolated goodness and kindness that some humans can show towards one another when there’s something that they don’t understand.

It’s about those very same humans not flinching at all when their gay brother, son, uncle and friend trades love for a solitary life to achieve their FULL acceptance.

It’s about the depths of indoctrination and how that thick muck NEVER leaves.

If the book was reflective of any sort of change in the LDS faith why didn’t his brother, the apostle, write it?

And let’s not let one little glaring fact escape this discussion: Tom Christofferson left the church and completely ignored the leadership for over 30 years during a time that many of us instead stayed. We followed the LDS plan of marriage, kids, callings, temple attendance, scripture study, etc based on our faith that it was true and that we and our families would be “blessed.” Instead of blessed, we got screwed and we caused a lot of collateral damage in the wake of our following the brethren. He escaped all that.

It strikes me as incredibly callous for someone like Tom to have avoided the pain of church activity and then to re-enter the picture later in life with a softened libido and tell his story of faith and family.

I was WAY more committed for far many more years when it was crucial and my divorce and financial ruin and raw emotions are all a result of following the brethren. His current life is only possible because he DIDN’T follow the brethren. His story, more than anything is a testament that leaving the church allows you you maintain some semblance of favorable attitude towards it.

I do believe that there are loving and accepting LDS members out there and I still desperately want to believe that my own children are counted among them. I’m glad those were exclusively the ones that Christofferson encountered in his east and west coast wards. My experience has been quite different for the most part. And yet I do recall my year long stint in college in a Manhattan ward that was much like he described even back in the 80’s. Nowhere else but in coastal metropolitan areas is it remotely like that.

But my point to my son and readers of this book is that for the most part it doesn’t matter. The end result will still be the same. Tom Christofferson is still alone. He’s still gay. Every single one of those “kind” and “loving” LDS members in Christofferson’s life and in my life will still walk into an election booth and vote exactly as the LDS leadership want them to, homophobic choice or not. They’ll still raise their hands to the square in obedience to the leaders in Salt Lake City even if it goes against their personal experiences and their own moral compass.

Yes, Brother Christofferson, we may all be one. It’s just that that one is in the image of a stale, tired and out-dated group of 90 year old homophobic dudes in Salt Lake City. That’s my perspective on your faith and your broken family.

Like this:

(Reposted from June 2011 in response to a question. Be sure and check out parts 1 and 2)

Writings that are directly challenging to conventional thought

The whole”anti” accusation is a tough one to deal with. It gets thrown around a lot in Mormon-land. What makes a book or an author “Anti-Mormon” or “Anti-Christian”?

Most of my Mormon family and acquaintances would throw anything into that category if it contains “faith-damaging” information. Yet, some of the most faith-damaging information is contained in official LDS publications. By using that definition, almost anything spoken by a church leader more than 30 years ago qualifies. In fact, some of the most damaging things I’ve heard or read were spoken or written by the living, modern day church leadership less than 30 years ago.

Boyd K Packer’s talks were the first chips in my firm testimony. Here are a few doozies:

But I think it was The Language of Prayer talk by Dallin Oaks that had my jaw on the floor as I realized for the first time that a leader could be just plain wrong. Then Divine Love delivered by Russell Nelson helped me realize that I didn’t WANT to worship a God whose love was so conditional.

Here’s a few more random LDS prophet treasures which include some ridiculous claims and advice for your reading pleasure:

As much as these talks paint the LDS faith in a silly light, I don’t think anyone would call them “anti.” My definition of “anti” is a little different. I believe it deals with intent and inaccuracy.

I know several historical and doctrinal criticisms of the Catholic church but believing them or even sharing them doesn’t make me “Anti-Catholic.” On my mission I regularly shared some of these facts. Without considering intent, an LDS missionary is essentially “anti” towards every other religion when he or she shares the doctrine of the Apostasy. So, a person can’t be automatically called “anti” when he or she is promoting a version of reality without hate and without animosity. Just because something pisses you off does not make it inaccurate or “anti.”

“You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad.” – Aldous Huxley

If I want to take down the Catholic, Mormon or Christian faith and will employ ANY means of factual and imaginary tales to do so, that’s what I consider “anti”. There has to be room for even an atheist to sincerely discuss religion without believers crying persecution.

So, the following books listed are more direct discussions of Religion, Christianity and Mormonism than part 1. The first section lists LDS books and those by LDS authors who claim to remain believers; Or they were at least very faithful at the time they were written. Nevertheless, the facts and the discussions within are far from faithful to the official party line.

And lastly, I’ve listed books that are more direct challenges to the LDS Doctrine and History or Christianity by outsiders that some will consider “anti”. I don’t. Again, I don’t necessarily agree with everything written in every book here. I’d encourage anyone to research and confirm facts all on their own. I did.

The gospel of Jesus Christ clearly says to us as far as the world of truth and fact is concerned, there’s nothing out there to be afraid of. The Latter- day Saint leans into learning with a gusto, or should. -Elder Neal A. Maxwell

If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed. -J. Reuben Clark

Like this:

(Reposted from June 2011 in response to a question. Be sure and check out parts 1 and 2)

I have a really good friend I was visiting the other day who was discussing some of the recent books she’s read. I blurted out that I don’t read much, but then as she listed some of the books she’s read lately I was able to answer, “I’ve read that…read that…read that…check.” So, maybe I do actually read a lot. I always have 2-3 different books I’m reading at a given time. One stays in my briefcase for those times I’m on the road waiting for a plane or eating out alone. Another one remains at my bedside table at home for my evening read just before sleep.

My reading topic choices tend to come in waves… biographies… fiction… non-fiction… religious… humor… biographies… non-fiction, etc… I’ll stick with a genre for a month or two before I burn out and move on to my next area of interest.

Reading is both a source of entertainment and information to me. More than anything, over the last few years reading has been a source of self-confidence in my life path. I don’t have a label for my beliefs, but I can say that reading has been extremely helpful in determining that it’s better to NOT know everything than to be cocksure certain about what is true. It really is accurate that the more you learn the more you realize you don’t know. I try now to stick with the old adage “Seek those who seek, doubt those who find.”

It’s therefore curious to me that the most confidently certain, knowing people I am acquainted with are the people who read the least. And when they do read, they almost exclusively read the topics that support their current beliefs. I at least try not to do this.

I think that that was my downfall as a Mormon actually… that I was never afraid to search and read things that contradicted my beliefs. I, of course, had the confidence that the truth had no challenge that could not be addressed and answered. That’s another reason that I refrain from labeling myself today as an atheist or whatever. I’m open to changing my worldview the more I learn.

I understand that not everyone feels that way. When something overtly challenges their belief structure it can be extremely offensive and intimidating.

So, for part 1 of my book recommendations, I have decided to list the non-fiction books that helped me question my original beliefs even though these have little to no direct connection to Mormonism. In other words, I don’t believe these are “anti” anything. In listing books here I’m not even saying that I agree with 100% that is written inside, but they did challenge me to think. They opened my eyes to a way of thinking about facts and the world around me that I hadn’t encountered before. A couple of the authors included here are well-know atheists but I found these particular books to be their earlier or less confrontational writings.

These would be books that I wouldn’t have had to read covertly as a Mormon, or books that peers of mine have certainly read and come to different conclusions (in other words, they stayed Mormon); but they challenged me to question that world.

Like this:

I was catching up on my DVRing tonight and watched the latest episode of Dexter.

For the uninitiated, Dexter is a Showtime series about a serial killer who targets other killers. It’s completely messed up because Dexter is somehow made into the protagonist. You root for him and don’t want him to get caught because all he does is get the bad guys.

Anyway, in tonight’s episode a cop was visiting the home of a wacko religious couple. They weren’t part of any particular religion but just psychopaths who just found a home with some crazy ass “prophet” who co-opted religion for his own selfish psychotic purposes (sound familiar?).

As this cop was leaving said crazy religious fanatic’s home, he notices some books on their bookself written by the suspect.

I CHUCKLED because right next to the book in question was a book by Gerald Lund, a Mormon novelist. It was one of the books in the Work and The Glory series, Vol 2 I think. Someone in the Showtime props department, knew their religious fanatic details well enough to throw that on the bookshelf!

Nothing speaks to crazy like a good old Mormon novel about the founding of Mormonism!

Like this:

About once every 9 months I run into the same unnerving problem. Granted, as problems go this is pretty minor. But it absolutely drives me crazy. Am I the one who’s nuts here? Am I the one who doesn’t fit the norm? Or is this just one of the most absurd side effects of our modern world?

In today’s world there are a gazillion web sites that all consider themselves special enough that they want you to register for them. That means you either get to pick your own username and password, or they assign you one. Sometimes the user name is just your e-mail address and sometimes it is something you had to create based on a certain set of criteria that each site establishes on their own. In other words, as much has I’ve tried to come up with my own standardized method for selecting usernames and passwords that I will remember easily, I inevitably end up with a handful of mainstays and a few exceptions. I forget one occasionally.

So, when you click on their “forgot password” link to retrieve it electronically there’s an entirely different set of security questions you have to answer before you get to the pot of gold…your password. Obviously I answered these questions a year or two ago when I registered for this site. This next part is what I think borders on idiotic.

Today, my first question was “Who was your favorite teacher?” Fair enough. I suppose everyone has one favorite teacher that comes to mind easily. Nevertheless, I think it’s a sad commentary on education for the general population when that question is meant to elicit one quick, easy to recall answer. Just one, really? I actually have 3-4 awesome teachers in my past that came to mind. But I tried to put myself back into the mind of myself when I set up this particular account a year ago. There’s one high school teacher that I’ve reunited with and meet for lunch occasionally.

I wrote her name. ENTER.

WRONG!

Oops! Just her last name, not her first name.

BINGO!

The second security question is killing me. “What is your favorite book?”

Do normal people really have one favorite book which remains their favorite throughout the years? It seems to me that you’d have to be a stunted reader to answer that question the same from month to month and year to year. My favorite book is the last halfway decent book I read.

I can’t remember what my favorite book was a year ago when I set up this account!!!

Calm down….think… surely I selected a classic in order to avoid this problem (I’ve been in this bind before. Same web site I think) To Kill a Mockingbird? No. East of Eden? No.

Perhaps I went with the whimsical choice of Harry Potter? No, no I didn’t.

Maybe it was a year ago that I read The Kite Runner or Running With Scissors or The Brief Wondrous Life of Walter Wu orWhat is the What? No, no, no, no and no.

Surely I was smart enough that I selected something short…Hmmm… I can’t think of any short book titles. The Life of Pi? No.

Now I’m beyond even caring if I like the book or not I’m just entering any title that comes to mind. I’m scouring my book shelf and entering those. The problem is I’m a big fan of the library so some of the best books I’ve read have long since been returned.

Nei. Non. Nope. Nah.

And so I remain in this dilemma. I’m stuck on my internet cable provider’s web site unable to update my free anti virus software because I can’t think of a favorite book so I can get the password that I also can’t remember. Sure, I can call in and spend 90 minutes trying to reach a human being. They’ll just ask me the same security questions.

I don’t have the time for this right now. F^&* the virus protection.

I take it back. F^&* the developers who come up with these security questions. Perhaps their life is so dull that “What is your favorite book?” elicits an easy to recall answer from year to year, but I think they’re morons. There has to be a better way. Why not something that isn’t likely to change but that still is known only to me?